The other problem, as any Usenet veteran knows, is that allowing completely free speech leads to the destruction of forums. The best rule is to allow people to create forums, and allow forums to regulate their use.
As one who has been through temperatures that would have been unusually cold here when I was young, you're welcome. We're Minnesotans. We can take a polar vortex for the team.
Actually, the people telling you that climate scientists are liars are themselves liars. Try tracking down what they say to what some scientists said. Most of the wild claims were the media, not the scientists.
rsilvergun was talking about how employees' AOL stock became worthless with the Time-Warner merger. I don't know the details, but there can be problem with keeping equity during a merger. You could probably find something about it, if it went that way, but the lesson is that you need to be careful about stocks sometimes. In a company that might get into a merger, it may be best to not buy the stock, or sell it immediately on receiving it. Prices tend to go up from the IPO, so it might be wise to wait a few days.
First, there's no law against putting canaries up before you get a secret request.
Second, the government cannot force you to lie. That's been true for about forever. Under some circumstances, the government can force you to say certain things, but not to lie.
By having a canary, you aren't telling anyone that you've got a secret request. You're just not telling anyone you don't have. This can have strong implications.
So, again, what legal mechanism is going to stop this?
If you actually paid attention to the world, you'd find that lots of people get arrested who haven't done anything.
An arrest does not require a conviction. At best, it's a matter of probable cause; at worst, it's a matter of who a police officer takes a dislike to. Once in jail, how soon you get out depends largely on how much money you have. If the bail is set at $1000, say, you can hand over $1K of your money to the system and get it back when you show up in court, or you can pay $100 to a bail bonds agency and not get it back ever, or stay in jail. (Bail has to be set by a judge, which usually means that if you're arrested Friday night you're spending the entire weekend in jail.)
How are all of those things I allow to leak about me going to allow people to use and trash my credit record or saddle me with fake debt? I know what I'm allowing out, and I'm fine with it. If I'm not fine with it, it doesn't get to the net.
Good news! People who think and want to dig into the matter can do so. There's plenty of information available on CDC and NIH websites, to start with. Lots of people could access scientific papers through university libraries, or find more stuff on-line. The 21st Century is a great time for those who like to check up on things.
The Crimean War of 1854 was the first one covered in the media of the time, so that's when people in general had some idea of the ugliness of war. That sort of thing hasn't been around that long.
When I was studying astrology back when I was young and foolish (I'm older now) astrologers generally recognized Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto as planets, assigned signs to them (Aquarius, Pisces, and Scorpio respectively), and included them in horoscopes.
I believe astrologers continue to believe Pluto is a planet, linked to the sign Scorpio. (Not the constellation Scorpio, since the zodiac used in astrology fell out of sync with the constellations a long time ago.) However, I don't know of any central astrological authority, so it would be up to individual astrologers whether to consider it or remove it and just link Scorpio with Mars again.
There was Canary Watch, which stopped in (IIRC) 2016, for what didn't look to me like an adequately explained reason.
They could presumably have canaries for individual customers, but I don't know about canaries that depend on taking down statements that have suddenly become false. I'd much rather rely on "We have received no National Security Letters through February 16, 2019", and when it gets into mid-March that canary looks awfully suspicious.
Except that I'm not demonstrating intent to violate the law by writing a canary. I'm writing a true statement. It isn't fighting words. It isn't creating an imminent problem. It isn't defamatory. In the US, there has to be a very good reason to prevent me from writing and publishing a true statement. Even if I'm demonstrating intent, that's not illegal. If I say I'm going to murder someone, that's enough to get a police investigation going, but it isn't illegal per se. I can't be punished until I actually violate the law (or conspire, I suppose, but a criminal conspiracy involves more than one person).
Now, the warrant with the gag order comes in. I can't tell anyone about it. However, I can't be legally compelled to lie. I can be told to say nothing, and that's exactly what I do.
I can't comment on courts receiving "this kind of argument" without specifics. Courts don't like legal runarounds, which this is, but there's not necessarily anything they can do about it. The EFF FAQ, which was written by a lawyer, believes these canaries to be legal. It does advise asking a lawyer when you receive one, since you can't be stopped from consulting a lawyer.
I didn't find any cases of warrant canaries being found illegal, although of course there can be court orders we haven't heard of. Presumably we'd hear of criminal penalties, since criminal trials have to be public by law. This of course doesn't mean the government can't give you a really hard time.
Updating the canaries to signify that a warrant has arrived would be illegal. Cloudflare would cease to update the canaries. They can't be required to lie.
Writing the canary in the first place is an act of contempt.
Contempt of what? Contempt in general is legal. Contempt of court is not, but what court? Until the NSL or warrant arrives, the courts are not involved, and therefore writing the canary is legal. In the US, you can't be legally stopped from saying something out of concern of what might happen in the indefinite future. So, for it to be illegal, there would have to be contempt of some particular court.
It's a form of legal trickery that appears to work. Usually, legal loopholes are iffy because judges tend to disregard them, but this seems to have legs.
I haven't received a government request for information about you as of February 26, 2019. That's a true statement, and it's not really possible to suppress it legally. I can keep updating the date indefinitely. The government can't crack down on that, because any infringement on free speech has to have an overriding reason, and there's no reason to suppress it for an organization not under investigation. This is similar to establishing document retention policies when nobody's asking for the documents.
It's unfortunately easy for the government to tell me I can't say something about a particular legal action. Selling the courts on the idea that the government has the right to force me to lie is going to be a lot harder.
So, what legal mechanism is going to stop this? Canaries are legal under normal circumstances. The government has some legal means to make you say nothing, and that's exactly what you're doing. If I had something saying I'd never received a National Security Letter on my website and took it down when I got one, that's doing something, and the courts can decide I can't do that. If I maintain a canary with a date. I just do nothing. I'd have to be legally compelled to lie in order to not have the canary tell everyone. There really isn't a legal way to stop a canary from functioning. A court can issue a gag order saying I can't do anything, but that's exactly what I'm doing with the canary.
I'm currently using Patreon to pay several people, and that's a lot more convenient than setting up several different payment streams. Individual contributions have problems at both ends.
There's a passage in the Iliad where one old fart is talking about the real heroes they had back when he was young, not like these modern whippersnappers like Achilles and Diomedes.
Fourth-generation programming languages were primarily pushed in the 80s, as I remember, so reviving them when it's thirty years later means that most of the people in the field won't remember why they didn't work.
Except that the customer doesn't necessarily want to be part of the process. The customer just wants to tell the development team what he or she wants, not necessarily coherently, then go away and have the development team deliver what the customer needs.
I went to the 2016 Ghostbusters movie with no expectations, and had a great time. And what's a franchise here? Two movies and an animated cartoon most people have forgotten about by now.
Slashdot Mirror
The other problem, as any Usenet veteran knows, is that allowing completely free speech leads to the destruction of forums. The best rule is to allow people to create forums, and allow forums to regulate their use.
As one who has been through temperatures that would have been unusually cold here when I was young, you're welcome. We're Minnesotans. We can take a polar vortex for the team.
Actually, the people telling you that climate scientists are liars are themselves liars. Try tracking down what they say to what some scientists said. Most of the wild claims were the media, not the scientists.
rsilvergun was talking about how employees' AOL stock became worthless with the Time-Warner merger. I don't know the details, but there can be problem with keeping equity during a merger. You could probably find something about it, if it went that way, but the lesson is that you need to be careful about stocks sometimes. In a company that might get into a merger, it may be best to not buy the stock, or sell it immediately on receiving it. Prices tend to go up from the IPO, so it might be wise to wait a few days.
First, there's no law against putting canaries up before you get a secret request.
Second, the government cannot force you to lie. That's been true for about forever. Under some circumstances, the government can force you to say certain things, but not to lie.
By having a canary, you aren't telling anyone that you've got a secret request. You're just not telling anyone you don't have. This can have strong implications.
So, again, what legal mechanism is going to stop this?
If you actually paid attention to the world, you'd find that lots of people get arrested who haven't done anything.
An arrest does not require a conviction. At best, it's a matter of probable cause; at worst, it's a matter of who a police officer takes a dislike to. Once in jail, how soon you get out depends largely on how much money you have. If the bail is set at $1000, say, you can hand over $1K of your money to the system and get it back when you show up in court, or you can pay $100 to a bail bonds agency and not get it back ever, or stay in jail. (Bail has to be set by a judge, which usually means that if you're arrested Friday night you're spending the entire weekend in jail.)
How are all of those things I allow to leak about me going to allow people to use and trash my credit record or saddle me with fake debt? I know what I'm allowing out, and I'm fine with it. If I'm not fine with it, it doesn't get to the net.
It might be even more worth considering to look at the actual data, or at least the massive amount that's publicly available.
Good news! People who think and want to dig into the matter can do so. There's plenty of information available on CDC and NIH websites, to start with. Lots of people could access scientific papers through university libraries, or find more stuff on-line. The 21st Century is a great time for those who like to check up on things.
The Crimean War of 1854 was the first one covered in the media of the time, so that's when people in general had some idea of the ugliness of war. That sort of thing hasn't been around that long.
When I was studying astrology back when I was young and foolish (I'm older now) astrologers generally recognized Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto as planets, assigned signs to them (Aquarius, Pisces, and Scorpio respectively), and included them in horoscopes.
I believe astrologers continue to believe Pluto is a planet, linked to the sign Scorpio. (Not the constellation Scorpio, since the zodiac used in astrology fell out of sync with the constellations a long time ago.) However, I don't know of any central astrological authority, so it would be up to individual astrologers whether to consider it or remove it and just link Scorpio with Mars again.
The Daily Stormer found itself another host, which shows that freedom of speech still works.
There was Canary Watch, which stopped in (IIRC) 2016, for what didn't look to me like an adequately explained reason.
They could presumably have canaries for individual customers, but I don't know about canaries that depend on taking down statements that have suddenly become false. I'd much rather rely on "We have received no National Security Letters through February 16, 2019", and when it gets into mid-March that canary looks awfully suspicious.
Except that I'm not demonstrating intent to violate the law by writing a canary. I'm writing a true statement. It isn't fighting words. It isn't creating an imminent problem. It isn't defamatory. In the US, there has to be a very good reason to prevent me from writing and publishing a true statement. Even if I'm demonstrating intent, that's not illegal. If I say I'm going to murder someone, that's enough to get a police investigation going, but it isn't illegal per se. I can't be punished until I actually violate the law (or conspire, I suppose, but a criminal conspiracy involves more than one person).
Now, the warrant with the gag order comes in. I can't tell anyone about it. However, I can't be legally compelled to lie. I can be told to say nothing, and that's exactly what I do.
I can't comment on courts receiving "this kind of argument" without specifics. Courts don't like legal runarounds, which this is, but there's not necessarily anything they can do about it. The EFF FAQ, which was written by a lawyer, believes these canaries to be legal. It does advise asking a lawyer when you receive one, since you can't be stopped from consulting a lawyer.
I didn't find any cases of warrant canaries being found illegal, although of course there can be court orders we haven't heard of. Presumably we'd hear of criminal penalties, since criminal trials have to be public by law. This of course doesn't mean the government can't give you a really hard time.
Updating the canaries to signify that a warrant has arrived would be illegal. Cloudflare would cease to update the canaries. They can't be required to lie.
Contempt of what? Contempt in general is legal. Contempt of court is not, but what court? Until the NSL or warrant arrives, the courts are not involved, and therefore writing the canary is legal. In the US, you can't be legally stopped from saying something out of concern of what might happen in the indefinite future. So, for it to be illegal, there would have to be contempt of some particular court.
It's a form of legal trickery that appears to work. Usually, legal loopholes are iffy because judges tend to disregard them, but this seems to have legs.
I haven't received a government request for information about you as of February 26, 2019. That's a true statement, and it's not really possible to suppress it legally. I can keep updating the date indefinitely. The government can't crack down on that, because any infringement on free speech has to have an overriding reason, and there's no reason to suppress it for an organization not under investigation. This is similar to establishing document retention policies when nobody's asking for the documents.
It's unfortunately easy for the government to tell me I can't say something about a particular legal action. Selling the courts on the idea that the government has the right to force me to lie is going to be a lot harder.
So, what legal mechanism is going to stop this? Canaries are legal under normal circumstances. The government has some legal means to make you say nothing, and that's exactly what you're doing. If I had something saying I'd never received a National Security Letter on my website and took it down when I got one, that's doing something, and the courts can decide I can't do that. If I maintain a canary with a date. I just do nothing. I'd have to be legally compelled to lie in order to not have the canary tell everyone. There really isn't a legal way to stop a canary from functioning. A court can issue a gag order saying I can't do anything, but that's exactly what I'm doing with the canary.
I'm currently using Patreon to pay several people, and that's a lot more convenient than setting up several different payment streams. Individual contributions have problems at both ends.
There's a passage in the Iliad where one old fart is talking about the real heroes they had back when he was young, not like these modern whippersnappers like Achilles and Diomedes.
And, in my experience, kids hate naps. Naps are wasted on them. The people who'd really appreciate them are parents with jobs.
Fourth-generation programming languages were primarily pushed in the 80s, as I remember, so reviving them when it's thirty years later means that most of the people in the field won't remember why they didn't work.
Except that the customer doesn't necessarily want to be part of the process. The customer just wants to tell the development team what he or she wants, not necessarily coherently, then go away and have the development team deliver what the customer needs.
I went to the 2016 Ghostbusters movie with no expectations, and had a great time. And what's a franchise here? Two movies and an animated cartoon most people have forgotten about by now.